SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Comparative appraisal with meta-analysis of picosecond versus nanosecond lasers for hyperpigmented disorders and tattoos.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of Q-Switched and picosecond lasers for acquired bilateral nevus of Ota-like macules: a systematic review and exploratory dose-response meta-analysis.Lasers in medical science · 2026Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the efficacy and safety of picosecond lasers (PSLs) versus nanosecond lasers (NSLs) for treatment of hyperpigmented disorders and tattoos, we conducted a systematic review of literature. PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane library (from inception to December 2024) were searched for articles. The primary outcome was the treatment success rate (≥ 75% clearance of pigment), and the secondary outcomes were the visual analogue scale (VAS) to assess pain and the rates of adverse events. We analyzed 20 randomized controlled trials and 1 retrospective comparative study comprising a total of 971 patients. For efficacy, PSLs and NSLs had comparable clearance for endogenous hyperpigmentation (RR 1.06, 95% CI [0.85, 1.31], P = 0.60), but PSLs tend to have superiority (RR 1.39, 95% CI [0.99, 1.94], P = 0.05) for exogenous hyperpigmentation. For pain assessment, the mean value of VAS for PSLs and NSLs was between 1.5 and 5.61 and 1.0 to7.9. Both lasers were tolerable and PSLs led to less pain (P < 0.01). Adverse events including post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) and post-inflammatory hypopigmentation (PIHo) were much more obvious in Asian than European patients. Meanwhile, compared with NSLs, PSLs had significantly less rate of PIH (P = 0.02; I
Indexed as
Identifiers
41184656What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.